tv Washington This Week CSPAN December 4, 2016 6:30pm-8:01pm EST
journal"'s "washington with news and policy issues that impact you. on monday morning, the a senior reporter discusses the future of caucus andemocratic the expectations of house republicans and trump administration. in the former mideast adviser to president carter will discuss the challenges facing the trump administration in counteracting isis inspired attacks at home, to like the ohio state university attacks. and governing magazine staff reporter examines the amount of federal grant money given to urban areas. c-span'so watch "washington journal" monday morning. join the discussion. on thursday, cnn and the kennedy school of government host the postmortem discussion
on the 2016 presidential election with former tram -- manager, kellyanne conway and clinton campaign manager robby mook. this is courtesy of cnn. ♪ thear stories from inside unprecedented and unprecedented lee ugly presidential election. for the first time, just the two of them -- kellyanne conway. kellyanne: everyone wants to go back in a time machine and make sure this results ability saw not robby: come. we won the popular vote. >> they take us behind the curtain and revealed a strategy. what sealed the deal for trump's a stork when? to tapne: he was able
into the frustration of job holders. toby: the fbi director sent letters with out reason. we would have won without them. this is the most overly gated story in the history of american politics. kellyanne: that incident affected donald trump's numbers significantly. >> a deep time with the man and woman running the campaigns. our exclusive interview on annex elusive state of the union start now. tapperello, i'm jake where the state of our union is still quite divided almost one month after donald trump defeated hillary clinton. officials from both campaigns are still raw and emotional, bitter and angry, more offended than introspective. hillary clinton won the popular vote while donald trump easily surpass the 270 electoral votes
needed to win the presidency. today, we're going to bring you something rarely seen -- both major presidential campaign managers sitting together doing a joint interview, discussing how we got here. a conversation both enlightening and contentious. trump's kellyanne conway and clinton's robby mook dedicated their task to having -- to seeing the other party have a terrible night. >> i know there are a lot of people here wondering what happened? what went wrong? hillary clinton on the popular votes than anyre white man in history, but this is a race to 270 and she came up short in states like pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin. she told donors that she thought
the letter from the fbi director, james comey was the nail in the coffin for her. do you agree? we are proud of her margin in the popular vote, but this was about electoral college votes and we did come up short. we felt very good about where we were going into the last 10 or 20 days in the election. i think it is hard to imagine the kind of impact that letter had. most of the polling showed a distinct drop and we certainly saw that in our internal numbers . particularly because the letter did not seem to have much of a purpose. he did not know what they were. those threek across states, we are talking about 100,000 votes, anything could have made a difference with such small margins. we do think that was an incredibly powerful force in the
race. the reality is, we were hoping and astronger performance lot of the data was off in this race. we have to reflect on all of those reasons. we were expecting to perform better with suburban women and we saw those numbers stronger day andsaw on election we think that was because of the comey letter. go to third people party candidates and we think the letter had a lot to do with that as well. there were a number of reasons, but lead among them would be the letter from comey. jake: you say the shift in movement away from hillary clinton and some of these democratic group started before the letter came out. theyanne: you see it in polls we saw internally. abc news released a poll on sunday that said 50/38. we knew we were not under 40 but everybody had to live with that
12 point cold because people held it up as evidence that the race was over, that there was no .ay donald trump could win by friday of that same week, it was a one point race. that was before the comey letter. herself, thenton night of the day that letter was released said at her rally that she, it did not matter because americans had already decided what a thought about the emails and it was already baked in the cake and this was the messaging point from her campaign. at the time, they said it was wishful thinking and maybe they were not being completely truthful and now it is supposed to be the comey letter. turned over 200 counties that went for president obama in 2012 to donald trump in 2016. that is because of messages that connect with people in this area, not because of a letter late in the game. i do think it probably had an
effect on some voters, but you and to reach suburban women the first female running for president as party nominee, why is the message not connecting to them? jake: let's back up to june 2015. donald trump comes down the escalator at trump tower and announces he is going to run for president. it seems back in the primaries that many people in your campaign want to donald trump to be the nominee, that they thought he would be easier to be than marco rubio. is that true and why? i think many democrats did believe that. opinions on that changed as he progressed to the primary and was very successful. jake: you have been critical of the polls, so let me allow you to weigh in on a rare moment of agreement here. i can be that
critical of the polls, but the polls were wrong for a couple of reasons. it's be very clear that these are mostly public polls. our polling worked and we had five different polling firms working, including my polling firm. we were using them for internal, strategic positioning, not trying to get clicks or call the race over before it is one way or the other. i think a few things happened. presuming between the 12 electorate would be to 2016 electorate, that presumed conclusively that secretary clinton would be able to attract and knit together and keep together the obama coalition. a critical mass of voters of color, millennials, and maybe even running up the total among women and she's the first email candidate. she was running a decidedly
reach out to women as an anti-trump message to the very end. that was a failing. the other failing was in presuming people who voted democratic in the past would do ourere, we thought in modeling that the 2016 electorate had a better chance of mostly resembling the 2014 electorate in these key states and counties, which is my obsession, the counties, then the 2012 election. oni talked publicly early about the undercover trump voter. the undercover trump voter, this is not somebody who is afraid to say they're are voting for donald trump. at some a does not look like a trump voter. the union household has voted democratic for years. the single mother who couldn't think of voting donald trump. why would she do that?
we took that approach where we were more open-minded about who the electorate may be and allowed them to tell us who they were. not what weut was wanted it to be in some places and there were different stories across different states. philadelphia did not turn out the way we liked and other states were not. but the one thing we did see across the country is we did see record hispanic turnout in a number of communities. that was important to our win in nevada and colorado. that is why texas was a lot closer than many anticipated. that wasn't enough for us to win the election, but that is something to be celebrated. iat was unprecedented and hope those voters continue to turnout. jake: coming up, the future of donald trump pasta tweets. will he maintain control of his account while in the oval office? that is next. welcome back.
donald trump took the republican primaries by storm using his celebrity and business background to propel him to the top of the polls almost from the start. but it was controversial campaign promises that made the headlines. mr. trump: donald j trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our countries representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. was: kellyanne conway allied with ted cruz in the primaries but she joined the trump campaign as a pollster and by august, he elevated her to campaign manager. and seemed toran get trump more focused and disciplined. the campaign scaled back some of his most provocative proposals. how important was that to his ultimate victory? i asked her to take us find the scenes. steve 17, the same day bennett is named campaign ceo,
it seems as though you and steve bannon were able to convince donald trump to be more disciplined in a way previous campaign managers had not convinced him to do so, had not succeeded -- stay on message, stick with your teleprompter, not that he only stuck with his campaignter, but your called them -- some of the gas and controversial statements he made, most of them took place disproportionately for steve bannon took over. and steve bannon say to him to convince them we will not take over but you need to listen to us in terms of staying on message. kellyanne: i don't really divulge private conversations but i feel confident telling you against one running of the most joyless presidential
candidate in history, it seemed to me. ?o why don't we not be that way why don't we find a way to be the happy warrior? he loved doing the rallies and connecting with people that way. you have to know who your campaign is and it's not a substitute for a quality, compelling candidate. in the case of donald trump, he gets his oxygen being out there with the voters. what did happen, the very end of the race, there were more undecideds than in a lot of races before and we think because the director of the fbi in what was ans unprecedented intervention in the election, a total breach of protocol, a lot of those undecideds broke against us, but i don't inc. that was an inherent problem. i think without those letters, we would have won the election.
fun.d a lot of i'm a joyful guy. hillary is joyful. we have a lot of fun. everyone who knows hillary clinton says the person you see on stage is not the person you see behind the scenes. i the scenes, she's much more amusing. thatou struggle to get person from behind the scenes out to the crowd? robby: there were a lot of headwinds in this race. the first woman to be the party, jake:major why is her being a woman in inhibiting? robby: having worked for a few women candidates, i think they face certain scrutiny that male candidates do not. sometimes, people talk about the way hillary spoke during a speech.
i did not hear her remark about male candidates that way. theink the bigger issue is russian intelligence, our intelligence agencies confirmed russian intelligence stole emails from our campaign chair and selectively leaked them out with the purpose of intervening in the election and helping donald trump. we faced these headwinds the whole way through. that was tough and i think it is -- it absolutely affected the outcome. jake: you took over when donald trump re-cast two of his more controversial proposals -- the ban on muslims entering the until we figured out what the hell was going on and the deportation force to round up undocumented and -- undocumented immigrants and remove them from the country. he never explicitly repudiated them but the way governor pence partd about them, was that
of the reset for the general election? it starts i think with explaining what you said and putting it in a different language. when the -- when trump flew down to mexico, he accepted the immigrant -- accepted the invitation and secretary clinton did not. people may say they don't like it, but at least they can read it. he has one. it there and he delivered it over 45 or 60 minutes and then i'm sure it's on a website somewhere. howhat regard, he explained he would approach the immigration system if he were to be elected. robby: president-elect trump without question offended many groups during this election,
whether mocking a disabled whether ar saying judge could do his job because of his heritage. did he ever express any regrets about that? we heard from him on election night a desire to bring the country together. but that job will be tougher because of some of the things he said before you came on board. kellyanne: i won't divulge private conversations but shortly before i came on board, mr. trump was in north carolina and gave a speech. some people refer to it as the regret speech because he talked expressed regret for having offended anyone. leader, showing humility and inclusiveness and regret, to use his word. but i want to say to you this -- if you talk about the world words alone, donald trump did
better among hispanics than did mitt romney or john mccain. better among women. on the cusp of being the first female president -- where are the women saying we must have the first female president? i didn't see them on fifth avenue or in the washington dc. jake: let's go to declan from harvard who has a question. >> my question has to do with president-elect trump process -- president-elect trump pasta medication strategy. he's known to tweet out falsehoods and other liabilities. is that something he plans to do after inaugurated? that is going to be up to him and the secret service .
i will tell you the president-elect looks at his social media accounts, a combined 25 million at this point. he sees it as a good platform to convey his messages. i can tell you there are posts he makes that otherwise would not be heard were seen, but he's a unique person who has been following his instinct and judgment from the beginning. one of the points i think we would all be interested in hearing is that in the last week he tweeted there were millions of fraudulent votes. there's no evidence. i don't doubt there were some, he says the only reason he didn't win the popular vote because of millions of popular votes is not true. then he started retreated -- read tweeting people criticizing, including a 16-year-old boy. i think the question arises in a room full of people who want
president-elect trump to succeed, who want him to realize a vision where there are more jobs and you achieve so much of what you want to achieve, is that really presidential behavior? that is presidential behavior, yes. i see where you are going. are you comparing what bill clinton did with the oval office -- shall we review for those who were not born then -- robby: just because a presidential does something does not make it presidential. kellyanne: the fact is this man is now president of the united states and is tackling very big issues. well. him very i'm a trusted advisor. good onmitted to making andpromises and the plans he's going to be focused on that.
we need to move on and support the president -- i don't like a lot of things people in leadership do, but they are there. to respect the office of the president and its current occupant no matter who he or she is. robby: i just hope moving theard from this that campaign is over and i hope the truth doesn't get lost or sacrifice. jake: hillary clinton's campaign blames the fbi director for her lost but it was the revelations of the email scandal the behind-the-scenes lit her top advisers. we will have more on that, next. welcome back. officials point to two things they say were out of their control that hurt her campaign. fbi director comey's investigation into her server and the hacks that exposed by wikileaks private you males of her campaign chairman and campaign officials at the
democratic national committee. but did clinton or any of her top aides bear any responsibility for any of this? hillary clinton's private email and we learneder that the campaign chairman sent you any mail saying did you have any idea the depth of the story. we were told everything was taking care of. in other emails, it comes every clearly that there was a divide between the new guard, you and some others and the old guard. feel someing if you of the actions and activities the old guardian either allowed to happen, did themselves or enabled, whether it is giving speeches to goldman sachs or setting up a private email server or the decision to become multi-, multimillionaires -- did the decisions i those individuals make your job close
to impossible? no, not at all. we came very close to winning this campaign. and as i said, we won the popular vote. said she regretted it was a mistake to took responsibility for it and apologized. -- youut it happened and are talking about james comey, he is in that conversation because of the email server. any of us on the campaign could have gone back in a time machine and changed it, absolutely we would have. but despite that, this was the most overhyped, over reported, over litigated story in the history of american politics. particularly because of what james comey did. they are not to intervene in electoral races, they are not to report out on investigations, to
the 3, 4 months before an election. this was a total breach of protocol and to write a letter saying we have read the emails and haven't even looked at them, it is mind-boggling why he did this. jake: one of the things that has come out after the election is james comey might not have felt empowered to do everything he loretta lynch not recuse herself from decision-making because bill clinton had a meeting with her on the tarmac. do you agree with that trust that bill clinton somehow empower james comey? yes.anne: that is true. the meeting between the attorney general and president clinton bothered the voters because it played into the culture or of corruption and the different set of rules for them and the rest of us. to walk across and within your talking up the grandchildren for
45 or 50 minutes. but to let jim comey be the scapegoat, in fairness, hillary clinton had a very bad time she wasng americans honest and trustworthy. that was in everybody's pulling and it was long before the investigation. jake: you refer to this as a post factual election where faxed of matter and you are taking issue with something donald trump said. the fake news and disinformation out there, there was a crazy story toward the end of the campaign where the nypd was about to throw hillary clinton down and the bizarre story about child sex trafficking and ateral flynn reach we did one point. how much of a problem was his post factual election? a big i think it was problem and there's a lot of things we need to examine.
congress has got to investigate what happened with russia. we cannot have foreign aggressors intervening in our elections. we know the russians were promulgating fake news. all due respect to kelly and her colleagues, this is not personal, but steve bannon ran breitbart news, which was notorious for peddling stories like this. i'm not attacking him personally, but they peddled a lot of stories on that website that are all. thatare just not true reinforce sexist, racist, anti-semitic notions. that are shocking and insulting and should not be part of our public discourse. kellyanne: the biggest these of face new -- of fake news in this election was donald trump couldn't win. that was peddled for weeks and months before the campaign.
if you look at major newspapers and major cable station networks, it is -- robby: i never said he couldn't win. kellyanne: particularly print stories. we have colleagues who we all respect, some of them in this room -- if you pull the whole , it is unbelievable. but this fake because it's based on things that are not true. they have no ground game. she has more money, she has more personnel, she can't parse -- you can't possibly lose. i'm not going to repeat the narrative here but they boil takes thenald trump wings off of butterflies. there's a difference between what may offend me and what actually offends me. are you at all concerned by the fact that intelligence agencies say russians were
hacking into gmail accounts and servers? itlyanne: i just don't know to be true. this --p campaign knew there clearly is a foreign actor doing it. just assuming it is true -- you are the one who quoted from wikileaks. national security agencies have said this is true. i don't understand why you are reluctant to knowledge with these agencies are saying. tolyanne: i'm not reluctant acknowledge it. that's not the question you ask me. but we are not pro-government interference.
it is outrageous a foreign aggressor got involved in our election. it should be investigated and it should never ever happen again. i read a story about a woman named diane hessen who was hired to study undecided voters and talk to them about what you're thinking. she wrote that was one moment more than any other where she saw undecided voters shift to donald trump. it was not the comey letter, it was when hillary clinton referred to the basket of deplorables. did you realize at that time that the comment she made was as potentially damaging as this one first of all, hillary apologized right after that. that is something that donald trump wouldn't do.
she regretted her choice of words but donald trump never apologized. i have taught donald trump right now. you are talking about one instance where hillary clinton said one thing. she immediately explained that she regretted. >> she regretted getting called. >> it definitely could've alienated some voters. i was proud the day after the election that hillary clinton said in her speech that donald trump is the president-elect and he deserves the chance to lead. >> robbie from the harvard kennedy school. >> i want to ask you about whether the clinton campaign was too confident or some might say air get throughout this election cycle in a way that could lead to complacency.
>> we know for a fact that some young people were voting for third-party candidates. i'm not criticizing or blaming them. i was frustrated at times and i think kelly and and i would said then people election was a foregone conclusion. some news organizations got into assigning a percentage likelihood to win. we need to reevaluate that system. >> do you think the clinton campaign bears responsibility for that impression that this was a foregone conclusion? >> i do think there is some responsibility. when they were opening of the leave and the public media polling, things were said that the election will be over before election day. people voted like this was the truth without fact checking or
verifying. shocking moment in the campaign was how donald trump responded. what happened behind the scenes with that excess hollywood video came out. campaigns are often defined by unexpected moments and how the candidates respond. for donald trump, his moment came when the "washington post" published this unseen footage. >> when you are famous, you can do whatever you want. grab them by the [bleep]. >> how did donald trump react? i asked kellyanne conway to take us back to the moment. who told donald trump about the tape? who watch it with him? teammit the members of the came in and took a few of us out
. we only have a transcript of the tape. anyway, you know the rest. donald trump decided he would like to put out a video apology. was the second debate in st. louis. he carried forward with that. if you look at the polling, that incident affected donald trump's numbers much more significantly mey letter affected hillary clinton. underway.ng was not most folks had already voted by the time the coming letter came out. letter camecomey out. did you think, this is done? >> not at all.
i remember the meeting i was in when that news came out is we were dealing with wikileaks. mills that the russians were leaking out, we had to deal with that. anyone who was popping champagne bottles was just wrong. in fact, we put out a video two and said wethat day could lose this. we got a rally. we fought hard. >> at what point was bernie sanders stricken from the list? we know he was on the list of 39 or so possible contenders. he obviously generated a great deal of enthusiasm. he obviously reached out to a lot of groups that you didn't find easy to reach out to. he won the michigan primary, won the wisconsin primary, two
states you did not win. why not put him on the ticket? >> bernie sanders is an important part of our campaign no matter what. we would not have had a successful convention like we did without the help of the bernie sanders. we would not have had so many supporters without the help of bernie sanders. he was an enormous part of our presence on the ground. .e are grateful for him the decision about who should be your vice president should be a decision about who you think is ready to do the job and who you can see as a partner. someone you can call on to work with you. that is how hillary approached this. and he was on that list because he deserved to be on that list and he was considered along with over 30 other people. at the end of the day, she felt like tim kaine which represent her views and values if he had to become president.
he had the background preparation to do the job. that partnership and that chemistry was the right one. >> you think bernie sanders would have made it a tougher race? >> yes. i would like to publicly thank bernie sanders for his effect on our campaign. he softened up hillary clinton. i was at the same convention in philadelphia and the fact is, his supporters were still out there protesting her. he was in the hall being a dutiful democratic convention soldier but his supporters were not. many of his supporters on election day were upset by the way he was treated and their views were never a simulated into the clinton-kaine campaign. i assume her choice of tim kaine had to do something with
virginia and something with not being overshadowed. he was not a affected pic in the end, at the beginning and certainly not the fight's presidential debate. he interrupted the female moderator about 36 times. someone -- i had worked with mike pence for over 10 years. he has been in congress for 12 years, 10 of which he is set on the foreign affairs committee. we always thought if we were going to get past that blue ball, it would be with a running mate who our himself with the concerns of the working-class voters. hillary clinton called donald trump to concede the election but why did we not see her afterwards? welcome back. after hillary clinton conceded the race to donald trump on the phone, we did not see her get a
speech. she waited until the next day for her public concession. why did she wait? i asked her clinton campaign manager about the moment that ended her bid to become the first woman president. >> john podesta came out and spoke to your supporters saying hillary clinton would not comment. a lot of people were surprised that there would not be a closing comment that evening given the fact that donald trump had one. we know now that president obama called hillary clinton and told her she needed to concede. the next morning she was going to get her concession speech. totook her a couple of hours get that much celebrated speech praised by everyone. >> a little fact checking there. we set the time for that speech the night before. we wanted to get our people time to show up and be there. it is not as if that speech was
delayed. >> the impression was she is having a tough time with this. >> know, and in fact, some of these reports, i'm not going to get into private conversations, but she made the decision to call donald trump. she made that decision on her own for she spoke to the president and she made it because she believed, and she has said during the campaign, that it is important for our wins,acy that whoever that their opponent conceded the election and be supportive of them becoming president-elect. >> that is true. we had a time on when we would speak with each other that night. we emailed and agreed. -- i seean ebay from in you melt from robby mook and i think it is a fund raising. >> you to negotiated? >> yes, we had a little plan.
trump andt to donald he is absolutely right, secretary clinton was gracious but she congratulated donald trump and conceded to him. that is a clear point to make here. now you have people stating in a recount. person who was asked, will he respect the election results, well his supporters moved on. i will post a question to her supporters. are you going to accept the election results because he is your president. questions were being asked about the wrong candidate. the combination of secretary clinton congratulating, conceding and then telling the american people the next day let's have a peaceful transition of democracy.
let's respect the process. >> thank you so much to both of you. now i look at president-elect donald trump's possible conflict of interests and what he should do when he takes office in january. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] . we want to welcome melissa gauger. good sunday morning. trump'su look at donald complex business holdings, what does he need to do to the best himself. guest: this is nothing like we have ever seen before. this is new territory for the american public. we have had this bipartisan view over the years that it's important that our leaders eliminate conflicts of interest.
i think in this case he really , has to look at divesting the interests of his company. he has talked a lot about whether he should move the company under his kids. that really doesn't put up the walls that need to be involved to make sure there is no conflict of interest between the business of the american public and his business. host: the president-elect would have to navigate what political -- what politico is calling a staggering tax bill if he is to be fully teased out of his business empire. even if he divests himself, who is running the business. his sons and daughter. i mean i'm same dentist, his children should have no involvement in the business as well. that presents a huge conflict of interest as well. clearly he's not going to stop talking to his children about what's going on in their day. it leaves the opportunity for a type of corruption and conflict
of interest. it's really would be in the best interest of both of them and the american people to make sure that they are moving these assets into a blind trust. divesting them. some way of putting a bigger wall in between his business and the business of the american people. >> the blind trust if you have , investments and stocks you can put that in a blind trust and not know how your manager is going to invest in those companies. in this case its physical property not just investments. guest: this is something we should have talked more about during the election and that his staff should have prepared for as well. there are two issues with this. you have the economic interests of the property. a lot of writers have written about the security interests of the property. you have a building with the president's name on it overseas. what kind of security risk does that pose?
of conflict of interest does protecting that security interest pose for the american public? i think it is good that donald trump and his advisers are having folks look at this and try to figure out what the best way to pursue is. these are real questions that we need and we need to have answers and figure out how to put this law in between these assets. i just want to read part of what they are reporting at politico. several prominent ethics experts pushing trump to divest himself saying he should qualify for tax certificate typically issued by the u.s. government office of ethics. no president ever asked for one. we don't know whether a president can get one. it is never happened before
because no one has ever asked for it before. >> this is uncharted waters. congress does need to get involved in these discussions. they are supposed to be the watchdog over the executive branch. congressthe members of have pushed for investigation and for talking about these issues. others have said, let's wait and see until january. i don't think these are acceptable. these are very complicated issues and we need to figure out .ow we put this wall in between host: article one section nine of the u.s. constitution says no person holding any office of profit or trust under them shall accept any office of any kind whatsoever from any king prints or foreign state.
guest: this is one of the areas that people have said when he takes office will he be in violation of the constitution. that depends on the key phrase does congress give him permission for this. certainly entering office with this hanging over his head. from a political standpoint this leaves him open to adversaries who may want to derail legislation or his presidency. when we talk about separating himself from conflicts of interest it'salso and his best interest to make sure he's not opening himself up to this cloud hanging over his head when he gets into office. it is clearly being brought up as people are concerned about the conflicts of interest. host: melissa yeager with the
sunlight foundation. her work is available online. along those lines i want to get , your reaction to what senator ben cardin had to say about donald trump and his foreign business holdings. >> mr. president the aim of my , resolution is straightforward. it takes a strict interpretation of the plain words of the constitution and supports the traditional practices adopted by previous presidents. it calls on trump to follow the precedents established by prior presidents. and confers his assets to simple, conflict free holdings. adopted bynd trust independent trustees with no relationship to mr. trump. it calls on the president-elect to refrain from using the powers and opportunities of this position related to the trump organization. make it clear if mr. trump does not take appropriate actions to sever his ties to his businesses congress will have no , choice but to view any
dealings mr. trump has through this companies with foreign governments or entities as a potential violation of the clause. host: senator ben cardin in maryland. guest: we are glad he is raising the questions and starting a conversation in congress. how do we separate the conflict of interest? i would like to hear more republicans talking on this issue about how they would like to see these conflicts of interest it dealt with. it has become a very partisan issue but it really isn't. the american people should be able to come to an agreement that having a president who has a running business that could create a pathway for money and corruption in the american government is concerning and
what steps are we going to take to ensure there is not attempt -- that there is not the temptation or possibility of corruption in our system. i think that'sthis is why you have an ethics lawyer you consult with when you are president. i hope the people who are advising donald trump take this very seriously. aboutt you have to say this clause in the constitution? >> the issue is when you have a lot of governments overseas who may be state run or have connections to state run businesses, for instance, i think what we are looking at with mr. trump is you have, say his debt owned by china and a lot of state run interests.
at one point or you hold and to a foreign government? those are some of the issues people are concerned about. it says it gets and business, we need to have a discussion about what things might constitute. when president obama came into office, there was a discussion about his nobel prize money and how that would fit under this. that isn't something that hasn't been discussed before. that is light an ethics lawyer they consult with while you are president. i hope that the people are advising donald trump take this very seriously. >> not far from the white house is the old post office, which is now a trump property. donald trump is a tenant of that property. can he as the president be the tenant of a gsa operative building? in this case, a hotel.
guest: there is a lease that says you cannot be an employee of the united states government. he cannot be the leaseholder and the president of the united states or employee of the government. it's pretty spelled out that is one area where you would be in conflict. the post office building kind of quintessentially puts together all the different issues. you have the domestic issues of the lease. an american president having business interests run by a government agency. the domestic issue there. you also have stories of foreign diplomats making reservations there. we don't think about it here as much, but in many countries is
how gain influence. making sure you stay at the 's propertyl person or hotel. that's very concerning as well to see that foreign diplomats are making reservations there because they perceive that as a way to gain influence. >> glenn is joining us from california on the republican line. melissa j of the sunlight foundation. caller: good morning. what do you call accepting a million-dollar peace prize and then effectively sponsoring illegal aliens through executive orders that the courts have found unconstitutional? why aren't you talking about the president in office? he's got a clean slate from the press. he's just such a great guy. the sunlight foundation -- what are you guys? part of the democratic party?
it's disgusting what c-span has stooped to nowadays. isn't that a million-dollar gift? what is this crap that america is going to? host: we did not stoop to anything. this program allows people from leading think tanks to come to the table and promote their point of view. the purpose is for you and others to phone in and have a civil dialogue. we may not always agree with the guest that we have on, but a chance for you to watch and listen and learn and also weigh in. with regard to the nobel peace prize, you want to respond? guest: the sunlight foundation is nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to open government and government transparency. no matter who you voted for that should be something we all value.
we did have a transparent government that we could follow and understand the process and it is a government that is free of corruption. president, when he came into his term, this is something that his ethics lawyer did red flag. there was substantial debate about whether he could accept this. what they could do with it. they decided in that case the prize was note from a government, but from an independent organization. that's why you have an ethics lawyer. so you can have these discussions and make sure that you are flagging things. host: we certainly encourage you to disagree with our guest will we ask that you do so in a civil
way. that's one of the hallmarks of our network. we appreciate that. joining us from west plains, missouri. caller: good morning. first of all there is such thing as nonpartisan. this woman is definitely a democrat. they are the only ones that are so concerned. how come you weren't so concerned when hillary clinton bill clinton and chelsea had a foundation and bill clinton was making all kinds of speeches? i think hillary clinton was getting paid while she was secretary of state. i didn't see the sunlight foundation doing a damn thing about it or being concerned about it. thank you. guest: actually we were concerned about that. if the election had gone a different way, you would see me on here talking about the nation. especially the idea tossed around that chelsea would be
running the foundation. a lot of people prepared for those conflicts of interest and there was a surprising election that has switched us the other way. i wish we had talked more about conflicts of interest during the election. i can't see how this is a partisan issue. if you are upset about the foundation, you should be upset about this too. i think this -- i don't think this has to be an adversarial thing. i think this should be something we as the american people say there is a standard that we believe that government service is important and it's important that our government leaders, when they come into office aren't tempted by outside , business. they are there to serve the american people and that we put a structure in place to ensure that the american people are protected. host: jerry from georgia on the democrat line with melissa yeager. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm a democrat and a live in a hotbed of republicans. it's not
easy being a democrat where i live in north georgia. i hope that you can do some of the things that you plan to do. i can tell you the people that are republican in my area don't care about rules. they don't care about morality. they don't care about rules and politics. i think trump is going to be able to do whatever he wants to do no matter what. the sunlight foundation or the democrats try to do. that's my comment. thank you. guest: this is why government participation is important. many people are paying attention to what has been happening in their government and have very strong feelings about that. i hope that if you have strong feelings either way that you are contacting your lawmakers and making sure your voice is heard
on this issue. just because there are people who feel like these are partisan issues, i really don't feel the idea that we would make sure that our government is free from conflicts of interest and that we have a structure in place to make sure the business of the american people takes precedent doesn't seem like something thae republicans and democrats should be that far apart on. i would encourage members of congress on both sides to work together to make sure we come up with a solution for this. host: who funds the sunlight foundation? guest: we have them posted on our website. a variety of different folks. you can see all of the different donors. host: you also have a tracking of some of the potential pitfalls and issues that trump has been facing and will face.
can you explain? guest: we have been keeping an ongoing list of all of the reporting we have seen about conflicts of interest. this is something that comes very difficult for people to understand. the tweets about different pop culture issues that people can really understand easily and engage with. arelicts of interest difficult for people to understand. we wanted to give a running list of all the different reporting we have seen on issues both domestically and abroad where we felt like there could be an instance where the interests of the trump organization could be in conflict with the american people. the appearance of impropriety is concerning and something that he as well as the american people should believe that we should work to eliminate these complex. 26 different up to instances right now.
>> people can take a look at the reporting and evaluate for themselves what they think of that. host: republican line in washington, d.c. caller: good morning. i think congress has a plate full of things we need them to do from years back. we don't want them to get tangled up again with whether the president to be is going to be anything unethical. which i am concerned about also. i don't think congress should be anywhere near. that decision should be made at the supreme court only. all of these other groups are just going to be anti-trump and tie us up for another couple years. we can't afford to have that. we have kids that need to be educated. we have crime running brantford
industries. we have more important issues other than going with a president to have some ethical problems that have not even occurred. we are just assuming these things are going to happen and that he doesn't have enough common sense to separate them. i would like it resolved before it happens, but i think it is something that the supreme court should decide because there is no presidents on it. host: thank you. and thanks for listening. guest: she makes some great points. i don't know if the supreme court is the right avenue. i think mr. trump himself and his advisers that is something they need to do. there are some pressing issues for the american public. voters during this election said they want those issues brought to the forefront. my question is if there are
these conflicts of interests and we go into january 20 and he starts proposing legislation are we going to be in this constant cycle of what his motives -- whether he's going to benefit off of it even if he has the best intentions the fact that those are still there if people think political enemies aren't going to exploit those things i think that's a naive. i think putting the structure in place to ensure they are free of this is important and that's the responsibility of the president-elect. listen this is something both , president bush and president obama took on. most presidents evaluate their interests and make plans before they come into office. theren they are in office fully focused on the business of the american people. that's what we should be looking at right now as well.
host: melissa yeager has won a number of regional emmy awards for her investigating reporting. that's at kh sb tv. she has also worked in kansas city and is a senior staff writer at the sunlight foundation. she is worked in fort smith, arkansas. everyone who has ever been president saw their personal wealth increase. this time seems no different. no new rules. guest: you have to look at how their wealth increased. whether it was from books or a variety of other things. when we are looking at business that could be influenced by the decisions made by that office , that's very concerning. i don't think it's unreasonable to want to take a look and put a structure in place to make sure there is not a temptation to make decisions based on business. say he puts it in
treasury bonds. it is possible his wealth could grow as he moved the country. -- as he leaves the country -- as he leads the country. the concern is whether the decisions he will make in his office will affect his bottom line and not be looking out in the best interest of the american people. host: his daughter and two of his sons who are involved in the trump organization. donald junior and eric. this is the family as they arrived early on the morning of november 9 as donald trump declared victory. becoming our 45th president. we will show you the scene as we listen to alex in new hampshire on the independent line. caller: good morning. i would
like to question the ferocity of -- i would like to question the veracity of your guests's lack of partisanship. her website does list a lot of their donors but what they don't show is that george soros open society is one of their major foundation donors. george soros is a known international rabble-rouser and international reprobate known for funding far left causes. guest: that's why we put our donors on our website. you are entitled to evaluate those and make decisions. i believe if you look through
our coverage it is nonpartisan and we have done just as many stories concerning mr. soros. we have done a variety of stories about his background in donations and we have done a lot of stories about hillary clinton as well. our concern is mostly about the transparency and the accountability of government. i don't think that's a partisan issue. host: do you have a sense that , had she won, bill clinton already announced he would step down from the foundation. with there have been clear divestiture? guest: this would be the discussion we would be having. i think it's a discussion we should have had in 2008 when she was running. now about, having it phrase, greecehe the palm of the prints --prince.
how would a foreign interests perceive having a child running a business and with a see that as an opportunity? that would be the discussion we would be having. the strategy -- the advice of their would be, you'd need to roll that foundation into a new it intotion or divest current charities that do similar work. we would be having this conversation in 2020 when there are new presidents with new conflicts of interest. this is a normal conversation to be having at this time as we are transitioning. how are we going to be prepared to have a president who is ready to lead on january 20? host: let's go to tom in florida on the democrat line with melissa yeager. good morning. caller: good morning. i believe everybody from both sides of the aisle should be demanding of our congress and senate that every president, every senior staff for the white house, every congressperson, every senator
and every governor should be required by law to put any business they have in a complete blind trust and i would have insisted on the same from mrs. clinton if she were in the white house as well. we've got too many examples of rings like this -- we've got too many examples of things like this that happened. i am in florida, our governor, rick scott, he had to businesses with conflicts of interest. he says there is no conflict because his wife is running them. he was convicted of the biggest fine when he ran the health care company when he was a ceo. i don't really trust him. what do you think? guest: i think you have a very good it's important to point out point. that we have these rules in
place for members of congress and for other people who are serving our government. donald trump is correct that the vice president and the president are exempt from these. saying they are exempt from these rules doesn't mean those conflicts don't exist and that the propensity for issues to arise from those don't exist. they exist and in the past, presidents have voluntary -- voluntarily acted like the rules that apply to congress also apply to them. in this case i hope the people , that are advising donald trump gives similar advice as epic lawyers have given to past -- and ethics lawyers have given to past presidents. that's one of those areas were each state has to make its own rules. it is important to voice your concerns about the ethics laws of your state. that is one area that we talk
about a lot on the federal level but we don't talk about it on the state level where a light of the things that affect our lives happen. -- is this isis an issue that concerns you, make sure you're reaching out to your state level representatives as well. >> steep mission been named as the secretary of the treasury. rudy giuliani. arthur conflicts? >> you have a treasury secretary that works for goldman sachs and then heads a bank. in that case, able the much like hank paulson where he will then vested interest and put them in a blind trust. it does apply to that office and there are rules in place that allow them to do so tax-free. it is important to encourage people in the private sector to serve our government.
in terms of rudy giuliani, that is another issue we will have to -- justook at due to like mrs. clinton, giving speeches around the world and advising people. how will that be in conflict for someone who would be leading the department of state. that is something we'll have to take a look at. >> we are talking about the business interests of donald trump. our guest is melissa yeager. garrett is calling from our republican line. >> good morning. know if thes to clinton foundation or the global you elucidateuld
just a little bit. is an important thing to talk about because there is a lot of the back and forth about the clintons. i don't think it is unreasonable to say that there is, there were some issues that we should talk about. that we should have talked about and there should be a structure in place had she won. however, she did not win the election. here we are talking about donald trump and his conflict of interest. these are normal questions that we should be asking during this transition. i think the above issues, and looking at both candidates, either way we would be having this discussion about conflicts of interest and what does this mean. this congress need to take a look at the fact that the vice president and president are exempt?
that is a worthy discussion to have. it will be interesting to see what moves forward with this. are youis a tweet, claiming that a potential conflict of interest or constitutional? is there a difference? >> yet the clause about the constitution. there are certain things that fit under that clause and there are conflicts of interest. this goes back to the complexity of his financial dealings. there are things that are hitting all over. possibly things that are unconstitutional and things that are conflict of interest. it is important for us to have a clear head when we evaluate these and make decisions and voice our concernsit is importaa clear about what steps need to be done to resolve these. >> a quick follow-up.
if we are worried about the conflict of interest with children's businesses, should we be worried about spouses as well? >> that is a valid question and i think that is something we need to address. i really look forward to a more thorough discussion by the american people and members of congress on this issue. >> thank you for your call. >> alain up early in olympia washington. hat onare hanging your article one, section nine of the constitution. article one of the constitution only deals with legislative hours to him vested. is the one about the president. it would take a act of congress, an act of congress changing our
constitution to apply article one, section nine. i don't know why you are misleading this audience because, in my opinion, you are misleading this audience to make them think it would be unconstitutional and it is not. that's all i have to say. >> i want to remind you that on december 15, donald trump will hold a news conference announcing his own plans to do best himself of the trump organization. we expect to have his details on december 15. i don't think anywhere i've said that this is unconstitutional. the important part of this clause is that congress makes this decision about whether it is constitutional or not. just because something is constitutional doesn't mean that the conflicts of interest and the concerns of the business of
the american people may be in conflict with mr. trump's business and there could be an avenue for corruption. goes awayink that just because something is constitutional. i think the american people have the responsibility to ask questions about this and ensure there is a structure in place to make sure we are not distracted by these conflicts of interest once we get into january and congress is in session and we are trying to look at some of the things but her for certain about during the election cycle. >> what questions will you be asking moving ahead? >> i am interested in what they are designed. a lot of people are like, why isn't he ruling something right now. give him anable to chance to find the best avenue.
i will be looking on that press conference on december 15, what is the plan? what is the timeline? that is a reasonable expectation of any president coming into office. how will they make sure the conflicts of interest are resolved. woody steps they are going to take -- what are the steps they are going to take? we have to make sure he is not distracted by his business when he is ruling as president. >> thanks for being with us. we appreciate it. ♪ journal,'s washington live every day with news and policy issues that affect you. coming up monday morning, the hill senior reporter will discuss the future of the house the democratic caucus and the expectations of house republicans and the trust administration. this former mideast advisor to president carter will discuss
the challenges facing betrothal administration in counteracting isis inspired attacks at home, much like the eye has a university attack. and our staff reporter will examine the amount of federal grant money given to urban areas. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live at 7 a.m. eastern monday morning. join the discussion. >> on thursday, the sons of julius and ethel rosenberg visited the gates of the white ause to symbolically deliver request asking president obama to exonerate their mother. they say she was wrongfully convicted of espionage and subsequently executed with her father. as young boys, they delivered the same address to president eisenhower. get -- good? >> yes.
>> ok guys, let's roll now. >> my name is michael meeropol. in 1963i was 10 years old, the older brother. 63 years ago i delivered a short letter to president eisenhower. today, after 40 years of over research and struggle, we are sharing with president obama the fruits of that struggle. and once again asking for presidential action. this time, we are not merely advocates for our family, is for our country. learnnever too late to from the mistakes of the past. we are giving the united states government the chance to knowledge the injustice done to
our mother. >> this is a test to see if our government has the courage and the commitment to true justice to knowledge the terrible wrong it did to her and us. with the letter he presented to the white house at this spot in june 1953, gave president eisenhower the chance to pass that test. eisenhower failed it. but we hope president obama will demonstrate his compassion and decency and pass that test now. so, i guess it will go to you now. >> [indiscernible]
>> i not notice this is the place to do it or some other place. i've a letter for president obama. if there anywhere where we can do that? you can mail it to the white house. >> we have already done that. i was just wondering if there was a way to make sure it actually got to him. >> well, we tried. think very much, anyway. there you go. they said there is no way to physically drop it off. the only way to do it is to mail it and i said we didn't mail it, but we would like to have a way of hand delivering it. the understand these are different times. in 1953, you could walk right up. here is a lot more formalized.
safety concerns in the white house. we're not surprised or upset. the important thing is we symbolically did this to replicate what was done in 1953 and hopefully with very different results this time. the package has been sent by mail. we know that it was received. now the question is how to get it petitions. we can take questions now, right? >> what would it means you have this -- symbolic exoneration? >> is similar to things that have been done in the past. the recognition that the internment of the japanese americans was a terrible mark on our history. this was a time when an innocent woman, who the government knew had all this they had
secret material that indicated she never had a code name. the chief witness totally changed his testimony. this is the an acknowledgment that an injustice was done. it?nd how we feel about this was our mother. she was taken away from us when i was three and my brother was seven. he was killed when i was six and he was 10. since we can't bring her back till -- to life, there could be nothing more satisfying to us that have the government knowledge that this should not happen and this was a wrong. that, on a personal level, very important. we have gone through cycles of our history of hysteria, over punishing, framing up. we are in danger of that happening again and recognizing
in the past we have done things that we shouldn't have done might be a cautionary tale. earlier that we were doing this for our country and not only our family. i meant it. >> we are not asking for any compensation. earlier that we were doing this for ourwe are askingr a nullification of the guilty verdict against our mother. the system of justice was perverted. something that should resonate with president obama, who made a david himself recently about there being times in our history when we have taken actions against people who were considered threats. and we have come to regret that. this is one of those actions and this is president obama's opportunity to follow up his words with a concrete action.
the most significant thing was the recent release of the grand jury testimony of the chief prosecutor. at the trial, our mother was accused of participating with espionage meetings. of prosecution at the trial insulation made a big point about her typing. that she struck the keys, blow upon blow against her country. all wrong. the grand jury testimony was only released two summers ago. he said he never spoke to our mother about this at all. she had no involvement whatsoever. just that moment should indicate that the government case against her and not exist. processwhy we began the , first with an op-ed piece in the new york times -- "the new york times" and the petition campaign that is gathered tens
of thousands of signatures. we're doing it because president obama leaves office next month and this is the time when presidents issue statements. i want to make sure that we don't replicate an error. we are not asking for a pardon. this is not something that goes to the justice department. ethel rosenberg was a not guilty and she does not need a pardon. we are asking for a presidential statement that nullifies the guilty verdict and states that her execution was wrong. given that one of the principal architects of our mother's execution was roy cohen , who president-electron had said was his mentor. the chances of trust doing put his that would
mentor in a bad light strikes me as nill. this is the time to do it. if we don't get obama to do it, we are virtually certain that trump will not. >> let me reiterate the role of roy cohen. the chief prosecution witness said to the camera it was roy cohen specifically who came to him and said, your wife had just told us something new. he admitted that he had no memory of her tight it up. he said he did not know any typing occurred. he said he committed perjury and that roy cohen was the architect of that testimony. this is very significant in a macabre way that roy cohen would end up being the mentor of the president-elect. >> we can say that the ghost of
ethel rosenberg is going to hop the white house once the donald trump takes office. had because we never had that evidence. the grand jury testimony was sealed until the summer of 2016. it was that grand jury testimony that got us to put together the op-ed piece that ran in the new york times. you cannot not made a similar request. this request was sent originally to the person who deals with presidential proclamations. we sent her a letter as a placeholder to get the process moving. guess what, there was election going on. my guess is they were busy. know, we've had no responses from the administration about, well maybe should send it to the justice thing.ent that kind of we have had no specific
response. there was a story i heard on the news in which a reporter asked andone at the white house their response was, we are considering these matters. >> very generic. these matters. the time for these things is usually january. we are working to get to the point where there will be some statement made. a little bit more complicated because our father was framed for selling the secret of the atom bomb but was guilty of espionage. the evidence about our mother is so clear that there is virtually no argument about it. >> >> another just to see the state
of the union. and a look at the presidential race with managers of the donald trump and hillary clinton campaigns. ♪ >> this is ronald c white. he discusses his book "american ulysses: a life of ulysses s. grant" ronald c y, author of -- ofald c white, author "american ulysses: a life of ulysses s. grant" ronald: the men of middle height.